Debate to Align: Reliable Entity Alignment through Two-Stage Multi-Agent Debate
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.13551v1
- Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 06:54:27 GMT
- Title: Debate to Align: Reliable Entity Alignment through Two-Stage Multi-Agent Debate
- Abstract summary: We propose AgentEA, a reliable EA framework based on multi-agent debate.<n>AgentEA improves embedding quality through entity representation preference optimization.<n>It then introduces a two-stage multi-role debate mechanism consisting of lightweight debate verification and deep debate alignment.
- Score: 13.025981335381637
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Entity alignment (EA) aims to identify entities referring to the same real-world object across different knowledge graphs (KGs). Recent approaches based on large language models (LLMs) typically obtain entity embeddings through knowledge representation learning and use embedding similarity to identify an alignment-uncertain entity set. For each uncertain entity, a candidate entity set (CES) is then retrieved based on embedding similarity to support subsequent alignment reasoning and decision making. However, the reliability of the CES and the reasoning capability of LLMs critically affect the effectiveness of subsequent alignment decisions. To address this issue, we propose AgentEA, a reliable EA framework based on multi-agent debate. AgentEA first improves embedding quality through entity representation preference optimization, and then introduces a two-stage multi-role debate mechanism consisting of lightweight debate verification and deep debate alignment to progressively enhance the reliability of alignment decisions while enabling more efficient debate-based reasoning. Extensive experiments on public benchmarks under cross-lingual, sparse, large-scale, and heterogeneous settings demonstrate the effectiveness of AgentEA.
Related papers
- Enhancing Decision-Making with Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Fictitious Play [53.56274149236814]
Multi-Agent Fictitious Play (MAFP) is a novel MAS paradigm that represents stakeholder stances as agents.<n>MAFP iteratively updates each agent's decision by best responding to the empirical mixture of other agents' past decisions.<n>We evaluate MAFP on challenging decision-making tasks that test the capability of deciding strategies for competitive scenarios prior to acting.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-17T17:31:06Z) - CHAL: Council of Hierarchical Agentic Language [0.5156484100374058]
We argue that the genuine value of debate, and dialectic systems as a whole, lies in defeasible domains.<n>We present the Council ofHierarchical Agentic Language (CHAL), a multi-agent dialectic framework that treats defeasible argumentation as an engine for belief optimization.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-12T20:26:41Z) - Adaptive Collaboration of Arena-Based Argumentative LLMs for Explainable and Contestable Legal Reasoning [1.4988096015658898]
ACAL is a neuro-symbolic framework that integrates adaptive multi-agent collaboration with an Arena-based Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Framework (A-QBAF)<n>ACAL dynamically deploys expert agent teams to construct arguments, employs a clash resolution mechanism to adjudicate conflicting claims, and utilizes uncertainty-aware escalation for borderline cases.<n>Our framework supports a Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) contestability workflow, enabling users to directly audit and modify the underlying reasoning graph to influence the final judgment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-21T17:47:13Z) - AgenticSimLaw: A Juvenile Courtroom Multi-Agent Debate Simulation for Explainable High-Stakes Tabular Decision Making [0.6218206949753592]
We introduce AgenticSimLaw, a role-structured, multi-agent debate framework that provides transparent and controllable testtime reasoning.<n>Unlike black-box approaches, our courtroom-style orchestration explicitly defines agent roles.<n>We benchmark this framework on young adult recidivism prediction using the NLSY97 dataset.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-29T16:26:10Z) - DynaDebate: Breaking Homogeneity in Multi-Agent Debate with Dynamic Path Generation [47.62978918069135]
We introduce Dynamic Multi-Agent Debate (DynaDebate), which enhances the effectiveness of multi-agent debate through three key mechanisms.<n>Extensive experiments demonstrate that DynaDebate achieves superior performance across various benchmarks, surpassing existing state-of-the-art MAD methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-09T12:01:33Z) - AgentCDM: Enhancing Multi-Agent Collaborative Decision-Making via ACH-Inspired Structured Reasoning [8.566904810788213]
AgentCDM is a structured framework for enhancing collaborative decision-making in multi-agent systems.<n>It internalizes cognitive biases and shifts decision-making from passive answer selection to active hypothesis evaluation and construction.<n>Experiments on multiple benchmark datasets demonstrate that AgentCDM achieves state-of-the-art performance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-16T09:46:04Z) - Bounded Rationality for LLMs: Satisficing Alignment at Inference-Time [52.230936493691985]
We propose SITAlign, an inference framework that addresses the multifaceted nature of alignment by maximizing a primary objective while satisfying threshold-based constraints on secondary criteria.<n>We provide theoretical insights by deriving sub-optimality bounds of our satisficing based inference alignment approach.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-29T17:56:05Z) - A Cooperative Multi-Agent Framework for Zero-Shot Named Entity Recognition [71.61103962200666]
Zero-shot named entity recognition (NER) aims to develop entity recognition systems from unannotated text corpora.<n>Recent work has adapted large language models (LLMs) for zero-shot NER by crafting specialized prompt templates.<n>We introduce the cooperative multi-agent system (CMAS), a novel framework for zero-shot NER.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-25T23:30:43Z) - Learning to Break: Knowledge-Enhanced Reasoning in Multi-Agent Debate System [16.830182915504555]
Multi-agent debate system (MAD) imitates the process of human discussion in pursuit of truth.
It is challenging to make various agents perform right and highly consistent cognition due to their limited and different knowledge backgrounds.
We propose a novel underlineMulti-underlineAgent underlineDebate with underlineKnowledge-underlineEnhanced framework to promote the system to find the solution.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-08T06:22:12Z) - Sentiment Analysis through LLM Negotiations [58.67939611291001]
A standard paradigm for sentiment analysis is to rely on a singular LLM and makes the decision in a single round.
This paper introduces a multi-LLM negotiation framework for sentiment analysis.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-03T12:35:29Z) - Rational Decision-Making Agent with Internalized Utility Judgment [88.01612847081677]
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable advancements and have attracted significant efforts to develop LLMs into agents capable of executing intricate multi-step decision-making tasks beyond traditional NLP applications.<n>This paper proposes RadAgent, which fosters the development of its rationality through an iterative framework involving Experience Exploration and Utility Learning.<n> Experimental results on the ToolBench dataset demonstrate RadAgent's superiority over baselines, achieving over 10% improvement in Pass Rate on diverse tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-24T03:11:45Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.